According to the recent data from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, health care workers suffer injuries and illnesses at nearly twice the national average rate. Hospitals had an incidence rate of 6.8 nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time workers in 2011, compared with 3.5 per 100 in all U.S. industries combined. Nearly 50 percent of the reported injuries and illnesses among nurses and nursing support staff in 2011 were musculoskeletal disorders. Nursing assistants suffered more of these disorders in 2011 than any other occupation, while registered nurses ranked fifth.
A significant part of the problem is that health care workers at hospitals, nursing homes, and home care programs face the challenge of moving partly or completely incapacitated patients. A typical patient weighs between 100 and 200 pounds, although many others weigh more. Consequently, moving a patient often requires two, three or even four health care workers. Current healthcare guidelines typically recommend that four health care workers participate in a patient transfer. These activities often create unacceptable risks of injury regardless of the number of health care workers involved in the patient transfer. The risks are even higher when a sufficient number of workers is not available to assist in a patient transfer. The costs of these injuries are significant. For example, injuries to workers' backs account for approximately 50% of worker's compensation costs for work place injuries in the health care industry in the U.S. Thus, back injuries to health care workers are a particularly vexing problem.
Patient transfer devices have been proposed to deal with the problem. Prior art devices, however, have shortcomings. In some proposed devices, the surface on which the patient rests does not cooperate or opposes the transfer because of friction, etc. Other times, the means (e.g., hospital sheets) for engaging the patient for movement are not effective or difficult to engage. The devices proposed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,378,148 and 6,834,402, for example, have bases that are generally too big and protrude forward too far. Therefore, the devices cannot be wheeled close enough to the resting devices to be effective. Other devices are designed to pull at locations on a sheet on which the patient rests. In some of these devices, however, the sheet, pulled at discrete locations, may wrinkle up and slide out from under the patient providing ineffective patient transfer. In yet other devices, slack on the belts or straps that pull on the sheet causes the motor or driving mechanism to “jerk” the patient when picking up the slack, which may be uncomfortable. Also, having to wait for the slack to be taken up increases the time that it takes to transfer the patient because taking up the slack increases the time for actual patient transfer to begin.